Author : Lowell Blasingame
reprinted by permission from “Taking a Stand with Christ,” October 2009
They certainly should be and that for several reasons. First, the sower’s seed was “the word of the kingdom,” (Matt. 13:19). The Lord’s kingdom and church are the same (Matt. 16:18-19) and the power for producing them, “the word of the kingdom,” (Matt. 13:19; Ac. 2:41) is the same. God’s rule for a seed’s reproduction is that it yield “after his kind,” (Gen. 1:11). So, churches produced by the word of God will be alike. Second, God’s word is the blueprint or pattern for the house of God (Heb.8:5) and houses built according to the same blueprint or pattern will be alike. To have a variation one would have to alter the blueprint. Third, following apostolic admonition necessitates preaching the same thing “every where in every church” (1 Cor. 4: 17) and when this is done, churches will be alike in name, organization, worship and method of entrance.
However, saying that all churches of Christ ought to be alike and that all churches of Christ are alike are two different things. Churches of Christ become unlike when deviations and departures are made from God’s word. Unfortunately, this is taking place and while we remain alike in name and in teaching what one must do to be saved, marked differences in organization and practice exist. This is true of churches of Christ now in the United States.
All churches of Christ now aren’t alike in organization. The New Testament reveals no functional unit of the Lord’s people larger or smaller than a local church and these were autonomous and independent. Each local church was overseen or tended by a plurality of elders (Ac. 14:23; 20:17), who were limited in their tending to “the flock of God which is among you,” (1 Pet. 5:2). Elders were congregational, not diocesan, and local churches were never bound in any inter-congregational cooperative ecclesiasticisms. No synods, no associations and no convention of churches existed by direction of the Holy Spirit, who was to guide the apostles into all truth. When apostasy did come, it found its inception in changes being made in the organizational structure of the church just as Paul had told the Ephesian elders (Ac. 20:29-30).
Many churches of Christ insist upon and seek to maintain the organization, autonomy and independence of local churches but others don’t. Some years ago a church of Christ in Boston, Mass. unveiled its “master plan” for carrying the gospel to the whole world in that generation. This plan called for a restructuring of the church by dividing the world into 24 sections, 7 of which were to be in the US., and establishing a “pillar church” in each of these areas to coordinate the work of churches in each of these sections. These churches were called “discipline-multiplying” churches. Students of church history will recognize this restructured plan as that which emerged in the second and third centuries that eventually evolved into Roman and Greek Catholicism.
Another unscriptural cooperative arrangement that emerged after World War II was the “sponsoring church” plan. It involved a local church’s assuming a work far beyond its financial ability and calling upon other churches to supply funds for performing it. Some brethren visited Germany following the end of the war and returned with reports of the devastated state of the German people, particularly their need for clothing with the approaching winter season. A church in Lubbock, Texas sponsored a drive to raise and send clothing for this need. I was preaching for a small church in Arkansas at this time and we collected more than ten boxes of clothing and sent them to Lubbock to assist in this project. Later, a church in Abilene became the sponsoring church for a national radio program for spreading the gospel across the U. S. We received a letter asking if we would become one of 2,435 congregations in the U. S. that would send $12.50 each month to this church for it to sponsor a national radio program for preaching the gospel.
The “sponsoring church” cooperative arrangement actually wasn’t a new idea but was a resurrection of a cooperative plan hatched in Texas 75 years earlier by brethren who opposed the formation of the Missionary Society for spreading the gospel there. It involved selecting a local congregation to which other churches sent contributions for evangelism. For several years the elders of the church at Sherman, Texas served other churches by serving them in this role. Earl West, in Search for the Ancient Order, Vol. 2, chapter XX, has an excellent discussion of this. This unscriptural cooperative arrangement finally gave way to a state missionary society.
This cooperative arrangement lacked Scriptural precedent and constituted going beyond what is written (2 Jno. 9) and violated the limitations of oversight given elders (1 Pet. 5:2; Ac. 20:28). In New Testament times churches did not undertake doing their work through another church and elders of one congregation didn’t act as overseers of the work of any church other than the one of which they were a part.
Some brethren in attempting to defend these unscriptural arrangements denied that the Lord gave any organization structure for the church. The late Reuel Lemmons wrote, “We are prone to forget that undenominational Christianity existed before there were any church systems, structures and traditions. We get most of our church structure from culture rather than from the Book. We make a creed out of congregational autonomy – a thing not mentioned in the New Testament and not debated in the New Testament church. We have almost destroyed the body functions of the body of Christ by disjointing its many members and have reduced it to the relative insignificance of local congregations, local in nature and isolated in operation,” (Christian Chronicle, Vol. 45, No.6, pg. 23, 6/88).
Bro. Lemmons envisioned the church universal as being composed of all local churches, which is incorrect, and says that we destroy its “body functions” by maintaining the independence of local churches. Individuals, not local churches, are the members who are baptized into the one body (1 Cor. 12:13) and it is an individual who is added to the Lord (Ac. 5:14; 2:47), not a local church. The universal church never meets for worship, has no treasury and no organization through which to function. The church universal is the “in Christ” spiritual relationship, not an organization. Had the Lord wanted local churches yoked together, the Holy Spirit, who was to guide the apostles into all truth (Jno. 16:13-14), would have revealed their organization. Its best to “speak where the Bible speaks and to be silent where it is silent,” (1 Pet. 4:11). The organization of the Lord’s church is revealed in the Scriptures (Phil. 1:1) and it is given by inspiration, not culture and its success is shown in that it successfully carried the gospel into all the world in less than forty years from the time of its origin (Col. 1:23). One might expect such disrespect for the local church from bro. Lemmons since he sat for years at the head of World Bible School, the largest missionary society in the brotherhood, and an organization that toots its own horn by flaunting the logo, “Nothing Compares With It In Our World.”
Neither are all churches of Christ now alike in work and practice. Once we all taught the need for acting by divine authority (Col. 3:17) and for restricting local churches to the work of evangelism (1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Thess. 1:8), edification (Eph. 4:12), and benevolence (Ac. 6:1-6; Rom. 15:25-26). A clear line was drawn between the responsibilities of the church and those of the home in providing secular education and in providing entertainment and recreation. Organizations providing these were understood as being adjuncts, (an appendage added to something.) to the home in helping it do its work; not to churches in doing their work.
Well known and highly respected preachers, such as H. Leo Boles, Cleon Lyles, B. C. Goodpasture and N. B. Hardeman, spoke out against church sponsored recreational projects. Bro. Hardeman wrote, “Again, I say to you, with caution and thought, that it is not the work of the church to furnish entertainment for the members. And yet many churches have drifted into such an effort. They enlarge their basements, put in all kinds of gymnastic apparatus, and make every sort of an appeal to the young people of the congregation. I have never read anything in the Bible that indicated to me that such was a part of the work of the church (emphasis mine, LB). I am totally ignorant of any Scripture that even points at that direction,” (Hardeman’s Tabernacle Sermons, Vol. V, pg. 50).
Washington St. church here in Grenada has twicefeatured a special Saturday night service featuring special singers, “Southside Singers of Grenada, Redeemed of Senatobia, Ms., The Williams Brothers and Company of Charleston, Ms. and many others.” Singing is an act of worship commanded of God (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Is this what these “special singers” are doing? If so, please explain why a church choir can’t be used Sunday morning??? If this isn’t a worship service, then what other acts of worship may be used for our entertainment? Can we have a special prayer band or how about a special “communion squad” to put on a performance on the Lord’s supper? This is being done by a people who once emphasized the importance of “speaking where the Bible speaks and of being silent where it is silent,” but who are no longer doing this.
The church at Higden, Ar. for two weeks in their bulletin announced and urged members not to forget their up coming “fellowship” that featured “hotdogs, watermelon, and ice cream.” Since they repeatedly emphasized this, I guess they don’t have any “fellowship” on Sundays when they don’t have hotdogs, watermelon and ice-cream! This comes as close to correctly representing Biblical fellowship as sprinkling does to representing Scriptural baptism. Neither is Biblically what it’s being called.
Unfortunately all churches of Christ aren’t alike. Some, who wear the name, no longer “call Bible things by Bible names” or “speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where it is silent.” We’ve ceased to emphasize our need for Scriptural authority (1 Pet. 4:11) and for walking “by faith” (2 Cor. 5: 7; Rom. 10:17) and like ancient Israel, we’ve become a people that speak “half in the speech of Ashdod” (Neh. 13:24). We need to return to “the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein,” as Jeremiah pleaded with his people to do (Jer. 6:16) and cease to “trust in lying words that cannot profit,” (Jer. 7:8).
